Apex court to announce verdict on plea for formation of full court in the case pertaining to military trials of civilians tomorrow

ISLAMABAD, August 01 (SABAH): The Supreme Court of Pakistan will announce tomorrow (Wednesday) its verdict on a plea seeking formation of a full court on civilians’ trials in military courts.

On Monday, the apex court was requested to constitute a full court for the ongoing hearing on the petitions.

“The full court should include all judges willing and available for the adjudication on the fundamental and complex constitutional and legal questions,” Karamat Ali argued in the fresh application filed through his lawyer Faisal Siddiqi.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had rejected government’s request for constitution of a full bench to hear the petitions.

A six-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Umar Ata Bandial, and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Munib Akhtar, Justice Yahya Afridi, Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, and Justice Ayesha A. Malik, reserved the judgment while hearing the identical petitions challenging the government’s decision to conduct trials of civilians in military courts.

“[Court] will hold consultations on this matter now. [We] will inform about the opinion in 15 minutes if the consultations are completed,” CJP Bandial said. He added that the decision would be announced tomorrow (Wednesday) if the consultations did not conclude.

Later, the CJP’s associate intimated the parties that the verdict would be announced on Wednesday (tomorrow).

At the start of hearing on Tuesday, the CJP noted that senior counsel Faisal Siddiqi had petitioned the court a day earlier to form a full court to hear pleas against the military trial of civilians.

Justice Bandial then said that the bench would first hear the arguments of the lawyer of ex-CJP Jawwad Saeed Khawaja, one of the petitioners.

“My client is the former chief justice of Pakistan,” Advocate Khwaja Hussain Ahmed said. “My client wants the court to treat me like a common citizen, not a special person. He wants ex-chief justice to be removed from his name.”

Here, Justice Bandial said that the former chief justice was a prominent personality and his petition was “apolitical”. At one point, the apex court judge also asked if Faisal Siddiqi was hiding, to which he was told that the counsel was outside the courtroom for some work and would return soon.

As the hearing continued, Justice Naqvi said the law didn’t give permission to “pick and choose”, asking why the inquiry [against civilians in military courts] was not brought on record.

Attorney General for Pakistan Mansoor Usman Awan said a lot of caution was exercised during the arrests. “Only people directly involved were sent to military courts. Those who entered the Lahore Corps Commander’s residence had been sent to military courts.”

However, Justice Bandial remarked that Awan’s claim could be proven if there was content on the trials available at any forum. The AGP said the court had questions regarding why the remaining suspects, arrested for May 9 violence, were let go. “A lot of people were involved but arrests were made in light of evidence.”

Justice Naqvi again asked why an inquiry, if conducted, was not brought on record. Awan claimed the inquiry was present. “This means that the government will conduct a court martial of the 102 people arrested,” the top judge remarked. Awan said a report on 102 suspects facing military trials had been submitted in the Supreme Court.

He also provided a breakdown of arrests made following the May 9 violence. According to it, seven people were in custody for breaking into the General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, four suspects attacked the army institute, 28 suspects attacked the Lahore Corps Commander’s residence, 15 people were involved in attacks on army garrisons in Multan and Gujranwala, eight suspects attacked an ISI office in Faisalabad while five were involved in the attack on the PAF Air Base in Mianwali.

He said 14 people were involved in attack on Chakdara gateway while seven attacked the Punjab Regiment Centre in Mardan. Moreover, 13 suspects were taken into custody for attacks on army garrisons in Abbottabad and Bannu. “All these people were arrested on the basis of CCTV footage and other evidence,” Awan added.

Addressing to AGP the CJP said, “It looks like you aren’t fully prepared to answer these questions. We have to look at the constitutionality of the matter.” The CJP stated that some judges had refused to be a part of the bench and asked how could a full court be formed in such circumstances.

Meanwhile, Justice Naqvi asked if other petitioners in the case were of a similar point of view after which Aitzaz Ahsan came to the rostrum. “This is very strange for me that formation of the bench is being challenged at this late stage of the case,” he said. “We have faced jails for the honour of the apex court.”

Aitzaz Ahsan asserted that he had “complete confidence” in the current bench, recalling that the court had included all available judges to the bench. “After the departure of two judges, this is a full court of sorts,” he said. He demanded that 102 people in military custody should be handed over into judicial custody.

On the other hand, Justice Ayesha noted that the reasons for sending the suspects to military courts were not mentioned in the magistrate’s order. Justice Naqvi also said that apparently only photographs had been collected in the “name of evidence”.

“It looks like you aren’t fully prepared to answer these questions,” the CJP stated, addressing the AGP. “We have to look at the constitutionality of the matter,” he added.

Justice Bandial then mentioned the plea filed by Faisal Siddiqi pertaining to the formation of a full court and said the bench would first hear arguments on this petition.

Subsequently, Siddiqi came to the rostrum. He said his plea “doesn’t have anything to do” with the government plea seeking the formation of a full court. “I will first elaborate on why our petition is different,” he said.

The lawyer explained that there were three reasons behind the filing of the application. “Even military dictator Gen Pervaiz Musharraf couldn’t oppose a full court decision,” he stated, recalling that Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Yahya Afridi had also talked about constituting a full court.

“The AGP has already said that no suspect would be sentenced to life imprisonment or death,” Siddiqi said. “The attorney general has also assured that military trials would not commence without the SC’s knowledge.”

However, he claimed, the government had in recent days raised questions on the legality of court verdicts and stressed the importance of forming a full court for a case as important as military trials of civilians. “When there is fear of conflict between institutions, a full court should be constituted,” he said.

The CJP stated that some judges had refused to be a part of the bench and asked how a full court could be formed in such circumstances.

After hearing the arguments, the court reserved its verdict on Faisal Siddiqi’s petition regarding the constitution of a full court bench which will be announced tomorrow (Wednesday).

Following the arrests made in connection with the violent riots that erupted across the country on May 9, the government announced its decision to hold military court trials of those found guilty of damaging and attacking military installments — a move both the government and the army considered a low blow.

In light of this decision, PTI Chairman Imran Khan, Jawwad S. Khawaja, legal expert Aitzaz Ahsan, and five civil society members, including Piler Executive Director Karamat Ali, requested the apex court to declare the military trials “unconstitutional”.

In this petition filed through his lawyer, the former CJP pleaded that Section 2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Pakistan Army Act were inconsistent with the fundamental rights granted by the Constitution and should be struck down.

Moreover, five members of civil society from different cities — represented by Faisal Siddiqi — appealed to the apex court to declare illegal the trial of civilians in the military courts.

Similarly, Ahsan’s petition challenged the government’s decision to try civilians in military courts.